Russian Academy of Ntional Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Feredarion (RANEPA)
Responses
In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?
Establishing a unified framework of terminology and concepts relevant to the agenda. Recognizing AI as a management technology when considering its cross-cutting application. Establishing requirements for equal opportunities to represent cultural and national characteristics and interests in generative AI systems. Initiating a permanent international scientific and practical dialogue on socio-humanitarian development in the era of human-machine (hybrid) systems and widespread virtualization.
From your perspective, which of the following thematic areas identified by the General Assembly Resolution 79/325 for the AI Dialogue reflect your priorities for urgent action and active engagement?
- Safe, secure and trustworthy AI
- Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI
- Interoperability of governance approaches
- Protection and promotion of human rights
Please briefly explain your selection.
1
Regarding what was not selected: the development of AI capabilities will proceed regardless of country-specific proportions, based on the capabilities of states and key companies; this issue can be revisited in the second phase of the socio-humanitarian dialogue. AI accountability remains a matter for the future, since at present it is mainly (when it comes to GAI) systems of probabilistic representation of the world-that is, imprecise ones. Open-source software must remain a public good, which should be accepted unconditionally; data openness depends heavily on national regulatory stances, while model openness depends on the financial and economic foundation of the developer-market ecosystem.
In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.
The Impact of AI Management
How are the governance gaps and related developments/advances in the thematic areas you selected above affecting your country, region, or sector? Please highlight the most significant challenges.
There is an asymmetry in the representation of cultural characteristics in modern GII systems, as well as a lack of uniformity in approaches to assessing ideological sovereignty. Security and trust issues are key when implementing AI into critical systems and are of national importance. The complexity of threats arising from the use of AI to compromise the integrity of information systems and structures requires a qualitatively new mechanism for proactive response.
What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?
Like-minded people in different countries, representing key AI development organizations, can build a "shared AI framework" based on common principles and values that go beyond what is essentially optional ethics, by providing publicly available tools for measuring the quality and trustworthiness of systems. This may be somewhat similar to the field of combating computer viruses; sooner or later, cybersecurity and AI will be much more closely integrated than they are now, ensuring the safety of humans and human-machine (hybrid) and machine-machine systems throughout their entire lifecycle.
What are some of the existing initiatives, partnerships, or mechanisms that the AI Dialogue should build upon or connect with, and what added value could the AI Dialogue bring?
Since national culture and traditions largely shape societal behavior, ensuring that the integration of AI into culture and the arts is sustainable and reasonably consistent is an important contribution to the Global Dialogue..
How can different stakeholders contribute to the AI Dialogue? Please share recommendations for the format and structure of the AI Dialogue.
Reducing inequality in access to key breakthrough AI technologies and AI-powered technology packages will result from cross-national cultural and technological dialogue, ensuring the seamless integration of generative AI into people's daily lives and the operations of organizations and governments.
Which voices, communities, or perspectives are currently underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance? How could they be included?
In the AI arena, the voices of developers, organizations, and countries are shaping the future of the technology. The widespread adoption of AI products demands greater emphasis on balanced feedback from educational systems, development institutions, society, and consumers in the broadest sense.
What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?
Designing from the future to the present; analyzing existing "futuristic visions," books, and film plots about future technologies to ensure humanity's harmonious transition into a new future with the lowest possible and most acceptable risks. Developing frameworks for international cooperation and publicizing these steps at the national level.
Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.
2
Today, the AI Research Center at the Presidential Academy and the Ivannikov Institute for System Programming of the Russian Academy of Sciences are collaborating on a joint initiative to implement dynamic trust evaluation systems for multimodal generative AI systems. We are also assessing the strength and alignment of the ideological stances of large language models with the Russian-speaking user base. Transparency and openness allow all interested developers to view an independent "academic" evaluation of their systems' performance and take appropriate measures if they are interested. Such evaluations are becoming mandatory when making decisions regarding the responsible use of AI technologies.